Recent trends in quality, patient safety, and error reduction in nongyn cytology

Advances in Anatomic Pathology

Volumn 17, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 437-444

  Silverman, Jan F ^a  

^a DREXEL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

critical diagnosis; error; nongyn cytology; second opinion

Indexed keywords

ESTROGEN RECEPTOR;

ADULT; AGED; ASPIRATION BIOPSY; BREAST CARCINOMA; CASE REPORT; CELL PROLIFERATION; CYTOLOGY; CYTOPATHOLOGY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; ERROR; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; HUMAN TISSUE; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; LUNG ADENOCARCINOMA; LUNG LESION; LUNG NODULE; LUNG RESECTION; MALE; METASTASIS; ORGANIZING PNEUMONIA; PATIENT CARE; PATIENT SAFETY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; THYROID FOLLICLE CELL; THYROID NODULE; THYROID PAPILLARY CARCINOMA;

ADULT; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BIOPSY, FINE-NEEDLE; CYTOLOGICAL TECHNIQUES; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; NEOPLASMS; PATHOLOGY, SURGICAL; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; QUALITY CONTROL; REFERRAL AND CONSULTATION;

EID: 78149247003     PISSN: 10724109     EISSN: 15334031     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/PAP.0b013e3181f89561     Document Type: Review

References (45)

1. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS. To err is Human. Building a Safer Health System. Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Institute of Medicine. Washington DC: National Academy Press; 2000.
2. Troxel DB. Medicolegal aspects of error in pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006;130:617-619.
3. Troxel DB. Error in surgical pathology. Am J Surg Pathol. 2004;28:1092-1095.
4. Troxel DB. Diagnostic pitfalls in surgical pathology: uncovered by a review of malpractice claims, part II: breast fine needle aspirations. Int J Surg Pathol. 2000;8:229-231.
5. Stanley MW, Abele J, Kline T, et al. What constitutes adequate sampling of breast lesions that appear benign by clinical and mammographic criteria. Diagn Cytopathol. 1995;13:473-485.
6. Nakhleh RE, Zarbo RJ. Amended reports in surgical pathology and implications for diagnostic error detection and avoidance. A College of American Pathologists Q-probes study of 1 667 547 accessioned cases in 359 laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1998;122:303-309.
7. Stastny JF, Geisinger KR, Michael CW, et al. Another quality assurance issue\amended reports: what do we really know about them? Diagn Cytopathol. 1998;18:67-70.
8. Young NA, Mody DR, Davey DD. Diagnosis and subclassi-fication of breast carcinoma by fine-needle aspiration biopsy. Results of the interlaboratory comparison program in non-gynecologic cytopathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2002;126: 1453-1457.
9. Renshaw AA, Haja J, Wilbur DC, et al. Fine-needle aspirates of adenocarcinoma/metastatic carcinoma that resemble hepa-tocellular carcinoma. Correlating cytologic features and performance in the College of American Pathologists non-gynecologic cytology program. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2005; 129:1217-1221. (Pubitemid 41407423)
10. Renshaw AA, Haja J, Wilbur DC, et al. Fine-needle aspirates of adenocarcinoma/metastatic carcinoma that resemble hepa-tocellular carcinoma. Correlating cytologic features and performance in the College of American Pathologists non-gynecologic cytology program. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006; 130:19-22.
11. Renshaw AA, Haja JC, Neal MH, et al. Distinguishing carcinoid tumor of the mediastinum from thymoma. Correlating cytologic features and performance in the College of American Pathologists interlaboratory comparison program in non-gynecologic cytopathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006; 130:1612-1615.
12. Renshaw AA, Haja J, Lozano RL, et al. Distinguishing carcinoid tumor from small cell carcinoma of the lung. Correlating cytologic features and performance in the College of American Pathologists non-gynecologic cytology program. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2005;129:614-618. (Pubitemid 40616963)
13. Hughes JH, Volk EE, Wilbur DC. Pitfalls in salivary gland fine-needle aspiration cytology. Lessons from the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison program in nongynecologic cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2005;129:26-31.
14. Renshaw AA, Voytek TM, Haja J, et al. Distinguishing small cell carcinoma from non-small cell carcinoma of the lung. Correlating cytologic features and performance in the College of American Pathologists non-gynecologic cytology program. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2005;129:619-623. (Pubitemid 40616964)
15. Hughes JH, Young NA, Wilbur DC, et al. Fine-needle aspiration of pulmonary hamartoma. A common source of false-positive diagnoses in the College of American Patholo-gists interlaboratory comparison program in nongynecologic cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2005;129:19-22.
16. Young NA, Mody DR, Davey DD. Misinterpretation of normal cellular elements in fine-needle aspiration biopsy specimens. Observations from the College of American Pathologists interlaboratory comparison program in non-gynecologic cytopathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2002;126: 670-675.
17. Renshaw AA, Wang E, Haja J, et al. Fine-needle aspiration of papillary thyroid carcinoma. Distinguishing between cases that performed well and those that f poorly in the College of American Pathologists non-gynecologic cytology program. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006;130:452-455.
18. Moriarty AT, Stastny J, Volk EE, et al. Fluids\good and bad actors. Observations from the College of American Patholo-gists interlaboratory comparison program in non-gynecologic cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2004;128:513-518.
19. Renshaw AA, Hughes JH, Wang E, et al. Leukemia/lympho-ma in cerebrospinal fluid. Distinguishing between cases that performed well and poorly in the College of American Pathologists interlaboratory comparison program in non-gynecologic cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006;130: 1762-1765.
20. Policarpio-Nicolas MLC, Wick MR. False-positive interpretations in respiratory cytopathology: exemplary cases and literature review. Diagn Cytopathol. 2007;36:13-19.
21. Silverman JF. Inflammatory and neoplastic processes of the lung: differential diagnosis and pitfalls in FNA biopsies. Diagn Cytopathol. 1995;13:448-462.
22. Solomon D, Nayar R. The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology. Definitions, Criteria and Explanatory Notes. 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 2004.
23. Ali SZ, Cibas ES. The Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology. Definitions, Criteria and Explanatory Notes. New York: Springer; 2010.
24. Simsir AA. Breast fine needle aspiration biopsy: prevailing recommendations and contemporary practices. Clin Lab Med. 2005;25:631-654.
25. Kronz JD, Westra WH, Epstein JI. Mandatory second opinion surgical pathology at a large referral hospital. Cancer. 1999;86: 2426-2435.
26. Tsung JSH. Institutional pathology consultation. Am J Surg Pathol. 2004;28:399-402.
27. Abt AB, Abt LG, Olt GJ. The effect of interinstitutional anatomic pathology consultation on patient care. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1995;199:514-517.
28. Tomaszewski JE, Bear HD, Connally JA, et al. Consensus conference on second opinions in diagnostic anatomic pathology. Who, what, and when. Am J Clin Pathol. 2000;114: 329-335.
29. Silverberg SG, Corson JM, Dehner LP, et al. Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology. Consultations in surgical pathology. Am J Surg Pathol. 1993;17: 743-745.
30. Silverberg SG. The institutional pathology consultation. Documentation of its importance in patient management. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1995;119:514-517.
31. Layfield LJ, Jones C, Rowe L, et al. Institutional review of outside cytology materials: a retrospective analysis of two institutions' experiences. Diagn Cytopathol. 2002;26:45-48.
32. Selman AE, Ninemann TH, Fowler JM, et al. Quality assurance of second opinion pathology in gynecologic oncology. Obstet Gynecol. 1999;94:302-306.
33. Lueck N, Jensen C, Cohen MB, et al. Mandatory second opinion in cytopathology. Cancer Cytopathol. 2009;117:82-91.
34. Bomeisl PE, Alam S, Wakely PE. Interinstitutional consultation in fine-needle aspiration cytopathology. Cancer Cyto-pathol. 2009;117:237-246.
35. Lundberg GD. When to panic over an abnormal value. MLO Med Lab Obs. 1972;4:47-54.
36. Emancipator K. Critical values: ASCP practice parameter. Am J Clin Pathol. 1997;108:247-253.
37. Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988: Final rule (42 CFR Part 405, et al), 57 Federal Register 1992; 7001-7186.
38. Code of Federal Regulations. Title 42 CFR Parts 493 to end. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office; 1998 (revised annually).
39. Rabinovitch A. The College of American Pathologists (CAP) Laboratory Accreditation Checklists. Northfield, ILL: College of American Pathologists; 2000
40. National Patient Safety Goals. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organization. 2004.www.jcaho.org/accredited+organization/ patient+safety.
41. Pereira TC, Liu Y, Silverman JF. Critical values in surgical pathology. Am J Clin Pathol. 2004;122:201-205.
42. Silverman JF, Pereira TC. Critical values in anatomic pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006;130:638-640.
43. Pereira TC, Silverman JF, LiVolsi V, et al. A multi-institutional survey of critical diagnoses (critical values) in surgical pathology and cytology. Am J Clin Pathol. 2008;130: 731-735.
44. Pereira TC, Clayton AC, Tazelaar HD, et al. Critical values in cytology. Diagn Cytopathol. 2006;34:447-451.
45. Silverman JF, LiVolsi V, Fletcher CDM, et al. Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology. Critical diagnoses (critical values) in anatomic pathology. Am J Surg Pathol. 2006;30:897-899.